Best films for Scanners
Hi, Could you please tell me your best tips (according to scan quality) of the slide and negative films. What do you think what is better in the fast range (400) slide film or negative ? For taking pictures of my kids the Velvia and Provia100 are too slow. I am using Provia 400F and Ektachrome Elite Chrome 400, I was reading that both are very grainy but I can't find the big differences between Provia 100 and 400 (slide projector). Kodak in my opinion has warmer colors than Provia. I am interested in your opinions in this matter. Thanks Tomasz __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free! http://photos.yahoo.com/ The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk To resign, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
Re: Canon FS2710 - APS
In a message dated 9/27/2000 8:45:27 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Has anyone tried Vuescan with the APS(IX240) adapter? I cannot find any of the normal settings in Vuescan. I haven't added any special options for this adapter. The problem is that there isn't any way I can figure out to ask the scanner if it has this adapter inserted. All you need to do (I think) is set the "Crop|Crop size" to APS. Regards, Ed Hamrick The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk To resign, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
Re: Conversion of 2700dpi to micrometers
Like apply fourier analysis and transforms to it, or use digital filtering and signal processing. But we don't. Why not? I dunno. Seems we'd rather piddle about with matrix filters, and other amateur-night stuff. Anyone got any idea how to turn a TIFF into a bitstream or WAV file? I could feed my piccys into Cooledit pro, and clean 'em up in a couple of minutes then, I'm sure. . I am using usually 2D dsp under Matlab with Image processing toolbox. It can read the following file formats: BMP (Microsoft Windows Bitmap) HDF (Hierarchical Data Format) JPEG (Joint Photographic Experts Group) PCX (Paintbrush) PNG (Portable Network Graphics) TIFF (Tagged Image File Format) XWD (X Window Dump) and you are getting just a binary matrix. After conversion to matrix you can select and apply a great number of DSP algorithms (including Wavlets, which are really nice in some situations). Just perfect tool, working in a batch mode and as a interpreter. You can write your program and apply it to all pictures automatically. You can also easily design your own graphic interface (like in visual basic) and if you need you can compile your program and make a stand-alone windows application. It is very cheap in US for students and academic stuff. Tomasz __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free! http://photos.yahoo.com/ The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk To resign, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
Re: Vuescan - native sharpening applied?
In a message dated 9/27/2000 1:29:36 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In the last couple of days I have made some comparison scans using both Vuescan (V. 6.1 beta 6) and Polaroid Insite (V. 4.5) on the same negs. You might upgrade to VueScan 6.1.1, although there aren't any sharpness differences from beta 6 (or any other beta). When comparing the scans in Photoshop viewed at 100%, it seemed that the Vuescan scans were clearly sharper. The Polaroid Insite ones needed USM at approx. 150/1.5/1 to achieve the same apparent sharpness. I used both scanning programs with no sharpening selected. Are you sure you have focus turned on in Insight? It uses basically the same focusing commands as VueScan does, so there really shouldn't be any difference in focus. You should be able to hear when the focusing happens. Regards, Ed Hamrick The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk To resign, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
Re: Vuescan/Old Kodachrome Unable to Focus
In a message dated 9/27/2000 9:37:31 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Nikon specifically say *not* to use ICE on Kodachrome slides in the NikonScan reference manual. I assume this would apply to VueScan for the same reasons (regardless of what they are). The dust removal in VueScan works just as well with Kodakchrome as Ektachrome. I use a different algorithm than the Digital ICE algorithm. Regards, Ed Hamrick The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk To resign, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
Re: Vuescan/Old Kodachrome Unable to Focus
Bruce Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nikon specifically say *not* to use ICE on Kodachrome slides in the NikonScan reference manual. I assume this would apply to VueScan for the same reasons (regardless of what they are). As with silver based BW films, ICE will probably fail because the film is almost opaque to Infra-red. I have however used Vuescan's cleaning feature on Kodachrome 64 and it worked *better* on that film than on others! I would *definitely* leave the infra-red channel out for BW (non chromogenic) films, but Vuescan's dust removal filters are worth trying on Kodachrome. If they don't work, turn them off and manually spot the output! Rob The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk To resign, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
Re: Negs and backlight
In a message dated 9/27/2000 9:06:21 PM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It would appear the default "automatic" is not appropriate for backlit subjects. The exposure of the scanner has nothing to do with the existence of a backlit subject. The exposure of the scanner for negative film is adjusted to to map the color of the orange mask to roughly white. This lengthens the green and blue exposure time relative to the red exposure time. If you look at the raw scan file (scan0001.tif) that gets written when you turn on the "Files|Output raw file", you'll see this effect. Whether there's a backlit subject or not is detail in the dark parts of the negative, not the light parts. The problem of a backlit subject is caused by the wider exposure latitide of color negative film. The intensity range that's captured by color negative film is much wider than that of slide film. It's actually no problem at all if you take pictures with a strong backlight, assuming you've set the camera exposure for the light levels in the foreground. The color information for the people in the foreground is still on the film - you just have to adjust the "Color|Image brightness" option to emphasize the foreground. If you want to get the detail from the backlit area, you can instead experiment with the "Color|Image gamma" option (at the expense of making the foreground image look flatter). Regards, Ed Hamrick The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk To resign, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
Re: Processor speed with the Nikon LS30
Vincent writes ... I am using SilverFast (v4.2.8r02) with my Nikon LS30 film scanner. When scanning a negative or slide on 2700 dpi with ICE the computer cannot process the data fast enough so that the LS30 makes a smooth scan. ... ... My computer has a 400 MHz Pentium II processor and a Tekram PCI SCSI controller and is running under Windows 98 and has a fast 45 GB IBM hard disk. Does anyone have the same experiences and how fast must be the processor to make smooth scans at 2700 dpi with ICE on a LS30? .. One can wonder if comparisons can be made, but I use a LS-2000 with a PII/350 ... and an Adaptec 2940U2W controller and two Seagate LVD drives, and have never seen a hint of this problem. Many have pointed to this LS-30 problem, and I don't know that the same problem doesn't exist with the LS-2000 ... however, Nikon probably sold many more LS-30s (hence more complaints) and most were probably installed with the included SCSI controller. It most likely isn't the CPU speed ... you might try a different SCSI controller (... eliminate any possibility by try an Adaptec ...), but I think you'll find (short of sending your scanner to Nikon to be fixed ... debatable ...), that Vuescan's implementation of "scan first process later" is your best answer to the problem. The Nikon software sould have also allow for virtual memory configuration, as if depending on Windows is some type of problem. Also, and altho expensive, Silverfast scanning software has been suggested as a better replacement for Nikonscan. (... come to think ... I've never realized any Macintosh user complain of this problem(?) ...) shAf :o) The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk To resign, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
Re: Negs and backlight
shAf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: BTW ... I use a LS-2000 ... and I have no idea if these features are available if the software detects a LS-30 ... or even if your scanner comes with the "feeder" adapter(?) AFAIK the only missing settings are the single pass multiscanning and the high bit setting. I think everything else works. Yes, the LS30 comes with all three film holders - slide holder, film strip holder, and film strip feeder. Rob The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk To resign, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
Re: Conversion of 2700dpi to micrometers
Roger Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rob, I may have at least part of the answer. I looked at 3 films under a 400x microscope - Kodak Gold 100, Fuji Provia F, and Kodak Elite Chrome 100. It was hard to find areas of comparable colour and density What was on the pieces of film you were looking at? Would it help if the frame was of a grey card or some other contiguous colour? but my initial impresson is that the "grain" (or dye clumps) in the Gold 100 negative film seem more discrete or separated (you might even say "sharper") than those of the slide films. In the slide films, particularly the Provia F, everything seems to be mushed together in multi-coloured smears, so there are fewer crisp edges to cause aliasing. Interesting - I scanned a piece of Superia 100 the other day to try a tutorial for removing the orange mask (written for Photoshop but I was able to do the same thing in PSP). Part of the process involves getting the mask colour from a piece of unexposed film. I noticed that the "grain" pattern in the unexposed (aliased of course :) had much darker spots randomly across it which sounds like the sort of clumping you describe. But then we already know that Provia 100F is supposed to be much finer grain than Gold 100. :) I photographed all three of them - if there really are visible differences I'll send them along to you. It would be cool to be able to post photomicrographs along with the scans of films - not that I expect you to photograph every type of film but it would be a good demonstration of the issues! Incidentally, a scanning electron microscope probably wouldn't work because it's designed to view surface features of an object rather than a section through it. And only then when coated in gold. :) I expect the film backing and emulsion is too thick to use a transmission EM. And if you sputtered it in gold you'd only potentially be seeing the top layer of the emulsion anyway. :) Maybe X-ray crystallography? Or even better - high resolution MRI. =8^D I wonder if the folks at UQ would let me stick some film in their 2 Tesla field... (ah, scientists and their toys...) The things one does to answer questions from this list...! Actually, I'm really impressed at the breadth of knowledge amongst the list subscribers! Rob The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk To resign, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
Re: Best films for Scanners
Could you please tell me your best tips (according to scan quality) of the slide and negative films. What do you think what is better in the fast range (400) slide film or negative ? Tom, I'm just starting an exercise to try to determine which films look best when scanned. What film scanner are you using? For taking pictures of my kids the Velvia and Provia100 are too slow. I am using Provia 400F and Ektachrome Elite Chrome 400, I was reading that both are very grainy but I can't find the big differences between Provia 100 and 400 (slide projector). Kodak in my opinion has warmer colors than Provia. You could try Provia 100F push processed to 400. I've read that this doesn't show much increase in grain. Mihai just posted about new Fuji films which could be worth checking out when they hit the stores. I don't know about others, but my experience has been that slide film shows less grain than negs of the same speed. I guess it's inconvenient, but a flash also allows you to use a slower film. :) Rob The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk To resign, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
Re: Negs and backlight
In a message dated 9/28/2000 6:11:34 AM EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: BTW ... I use a LS-2000 ... and I have no idea if these features are available if the software detects a LS-30 ... or even if your scanner comes with the "feeder" adapter(?) AFAIK the only missing settings are the single pass multiscanning and the high bit setting. I think everything else works. Yes, the LS30 comes with all three film holders - slide holder, film strip holder, and film strip feeder. The one other difference is that the LS-30 firmware doesn't support the batch slide feeder which holds 50 slides. Regards, Ed Hamrick The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk To resign, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
Re: Processor speed with the Nikon LS30
Vincent Cleij wrote: I am using SilverFast (v4.2.8r02) with my Nikon LS30 film scanner. When scanning a negative or slide on 2700 dpi with ICE the computer cannot process the data fast enough so that the LS30 makes a smooth scan. It makes the scan with small irregular steps. When scanning with VueScan (6.11) this problem does not occur because VueScan only import and saves the raw data and processes the data later. When I use SilverFast without ICE the problem is much smaller. My computer has a 400 MHz Pentium II processor and a Tekram PCI SCSI controller and is running under Windows 98 and has a fast 45 GB IBM hard disk. Does anyone have the same experiences and how fast must be the processor to make smooth scans at 2700 dpi with ICE on a LS30? (I am using Photo Shop 5.0 LE and Paint Shop Pro 5.0). Hi, Vincent, I have just switched from a 4-year-old 133 MHz system to a brand new 900 MHz Athlon Thunderbird system. My experiences are as follows: - 133 MHz: Continuous scan with Vuescan (but colors so irregular and ICE implemented so poorly that I still judge Vuescan unusable for scanning color negs that aren't fresh from the lab); start-stop action scan with Nikon Scan/2700 dpi/ICE on which causes *jaggies* that seem to correlate with the numbers of starts/stops during the scanning process; - 900 MHz: No difference with Vuescan (still unusable for me :-() but smooth scans with Nikon Scan/2700 dpi/ICE on with no more jaggies unless the scanner is interrupted by other software. During the 12 months I have used the LS-30 on the slow machine, my impression was that the jaggies problem deteriorated over time. It seems that something mechanicwise wears out if the LS-30 is being operated under these conditions. If you can choose and get over well with Vuescan (which I don't) or Silverfast (which I haven't got) I think you'd better avoid Nikon Scan for the benefit of your scanner. Best regards - Ralf -- My animal photo page on the WWW: http://mercury.spaceports.com/~schmode Find my PGP keys at http://mercury.spaceports.com/~schmode/pgp.htm or on key servers (use "TrustCenter" certified keys only) The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk To resign, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
Re: Conversion of 2700dpi to micrometers
I do not want to start a flame war, but I regard your post as very impolite. I did not quote any Kodak info, nor any Kodak web page. Do not measure others by your own standards. I am professional photographer and I have MSc in chemistry. I spent half of my professional life in photo industry, by chance I am a contributing editor in one of photographic magazines for 25 years. I do not have to quote such basic concepts from Kodak's web site. If you have problems with understanding such a simple concept as root mean square, etc, I give up. But if you need more help, I may scan one of Fuji publication, that may help you. Next time have more guts and sign your mail with your real name. At 23:24 27/09/2000 +0100, you wrote: Roman Kielich® wrote: RMS is a standard deviation from measurement of density D=1 on a photographic film using a microdensitometer with aperture of 48 microns...etc. Snip. Thanks for that garbled quote from Kodak's website Roman. I read your interpretation about 10 times and it still made no sense whatsoever. Why not just give us the original URL of your source, and save space. That's here, I believe: http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/programs/student/handbook/sensitometric6.shtml or here: http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/support/h1/exposure.shtml#graininess Regards, Photoscientia. The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk To resign, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest. "Don't worry about the world coming to an end today. It's already tomorrow in Australia". The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk To resign, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
Nikonscan vs Vuescan (was Negs and backlight)
Ed writes ...
The exposure of the scanner for negative film is adjusted
to to map the color of the orange mask to roughly white.
This lengthens the green and blue exposure time relative
to the red exposure time.
...
This reminds me of a problem I'm having with one LS adapter versus
the other.
A few weeks ago I was determined to make Vuescan 6.1 work with my
LS-2000. I experimented first with a Q60, but I got somewhat
frustrated, and I'm sorry to report I never got a true color scan.
What I noted 1st was the grays were not neutral (too much red, not
enough green) when I appled the Vuescan setting of Adobe RGB and
opened it into PS's Adobe RGB. I played with a number of settings and
never got it right. It is also a coincidence, if I took the Vuescan
"raw" scan, and profile-to-profiled it into Photoshop ("from one of
the Nikon provided LUT-ICM files "to" Adobe RGB), I got the same
colors ... WAAHH!!!
This is in contrast to Nikonscan nailing the colors perfectly,
neutral grays are right on, R=G=B. So, I returned to Nikonscan
(2.5.1). Now I have a frustration with NS ... its negative feeder
gives me perfect colors, but I noticed when manual focusing on
different areas, the focus units would be as different as 20 units.
So, I put the negatives in the strip holder and used the other
adapter. This fixes the focus (5-10 focus units), but the colors are
not the same. Geeez!! what is going on?? They are very close and
acceptable, but noticable. Why, given the same settings, would NS
read the same negative differently with different adapters? (this
wasn't a fluke, I could swap adapters, and these findings would be
consistent ... time after time). The feeder gives me perfect color
but doesn't hold the film flat, and the strip holder holds the film
flat but the colors are different. ... Weird!
Ed if you can give me a hint or two about how to neutralize the grays
... hopefully without bumping the R and G settings ... I'll give
Vuescan another try. (... but I do wish you'd consider adding the
"Adobe wide gamut" color space to your options ... I do see evidence
of Adobe RGB not capturing the entire gamut of a Q60 ...)
cheerios, shAf :o)
The filmscanners mailing list is hosted by http://www.halftone.co.uk
To resign, mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] with UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS in the
title, or UNSUBSCRIBE FILMSCANNERS_DIGEST if you are reading the Digest.
